<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>2004 (1) TMI 512 - CESTAT, BANGALORE</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=111125</link>
    <description>Goods cleared to the domestic tariff area under Development Commissioner permission were considered against Notification No. 2/95, which extended exemption to goods exported and goods expected to be exported, subject to satisfaction of the Assistant Commissioner or Deputy Commissioner regarding the prescribed conditions. The later dropping of proceedings by the Development Commissioner, together with the appellants&#039; improved export performance, was treated as a basis for reconsidering the demand. The impugned orders were set aside and the matter was remanded to the original adjudicating authority for fresh adjudication after granting the appellants a reasonable opportunity of hearing.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 06 Jan 2004 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 20 Apr 2012 14:33:18 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=148141" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2004 (1) TMI 512 - CESTAT, BANGALORE</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=111125</link>
      <description>Goods cleared to the domestic tariff area under Development Commissioner permission were considered against Notification No. 2/95, which extended exemption to goods exported and goods expected to be exported, subject to satisfaction of the Assistant Commissioner or Deputy Commissioner regarding the prescribed conditions. The later dropping of proceedings by the Development Commissioner, together with the appellants&#039; improved export performance, was treated as a basis for reconsidering the demand. The impugned orders were set aside and the matter was remanded to the original adjudicating authority for fresh adjudication after granting the appellants a reasonable opportunity of hearing.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 06 Jan 2004 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=111125</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>